The difference between AACR, LOC, DDC, FRBR, CCO, MARC and RDA

Just in case you were wondering.
Because I was.

AACR

• Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules
• Designed for use in the construction of catalogues and other lists in general libraries of all size.
• Follow the sequence of cataloguers' operations in most present-day libraries and bibliographic agencies.
• Proceed from general to specific details.
• Covers rules for books, cartographic materials, manuscripts, music, sound recordings, motion pictures and videorecordings, graphic materials, electronic resources, three-dimensional artifacts and realia, microforms and continuing resources.
• Developed for use by libraries in Canada, The United States and The United Kingdom.
• Uses structured punctuation; in fact, is very concerned with and focused on punctuation

LOC

• Primary Responsibility stems from the CDS, Cataloging Distribution Service
• Uses The Cataloger's Destop: "a revolutionary cataloging tool created by the Library of Congress, using Folio software"
• A limited list of resources found in the Cataloger's Desktop:
• LCRI (Library of Congress Rule Interpretations)
• Library of Congress Classifications and Subject Headings
• AACR2
• MARC 21
• OLAC (Authority Tools for Audiovisual and Music Catalogers)
• BISAC Subject Headings (Book Industry Study Group)
• CCO (Cataloging Cultural Objects)
• OCLC
• CONSER
• Cutter-Sanborn Tables
• UNIMARC
• CSDGM (Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata)
• DCMI (DublinCore Metadata Initiative)
• Erklärung zu Internationalen Katalogisierungsprinzipien (I just like that word)
• IASA (International Association for Sound and Audiovisual Archives)
• ISAD (International Standard Archival Description)
• ISSN (International Standard Serial Number) 
• ISBD (International Standard Bibliographic Description)
• SEPIADES: Recommendations for Cataloguing Photographic Collections
• FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records

DDC

• Dewey Decimal Classification
• Currently we are on the 22nd revision
• Is a division of the Library of Congress (!)  Ok, so why does the LC not use the DDC?
• Is a hierarchical classification system, proceeding from general to specific
• Comprised of 10 classes (100-900) plus 000 for generalalities (ufo's and librarians)
• Each class is divided into 10 divisions
• Each division is divided into 10 sections
• the numbers following the decimal point refer to notations regarding more specific aspects of the subject such as location, time period, and language.

FRBR

• Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records
• Developed by IFLA (International Federation  of Library Associations) between 1992-1995
• Evolved out of the AACR3 revision but ended up as a separate entity rather than an update of terminology only (see RDA)
• Is very conceptual and visual rather than concrete like AACR (which is very much an if/then model) and is useful as a system, as well as a method of organizing information for access.
• Works well with the Web and web based resources 
• Has three main 'Entities'
• Group One:
•  'Work', 'Expression', 'Manifestation' and 'Item'.
• Group Two (responsible for Group One)
• Person' and 'Corporate Body'
• Group Three (subjects of Group One and/or Two)
• 'Concept', 'Object', 'Event' and 'Place'.
• Deals with 'Bibliographic Relationships' 
• Inherant
• Content
• Equivalent
• Derivative
• Descriptive
• Whole/Part and Part to Part
• Sequential
• Companion
• Aggregation
• Assigns User Tasks, which are Cutter's Objects, evolved
• Find
• Identitfy
• Select
• Obtain
• Navigate
• Off shoots are: 
• FRAD (Functional Requirements for Authority Data
• FRSAR (Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records)
• FRANAR (Functional Requirements and Numbering for Authority Record

CCO

• Cataloging Cultural Objects
• Developed by the Visual Resources Association as a guide for describing cultural works (architecture, art, dance, music etc.) and their images (photographs, paintings, etc.)
• Contains rules for formatting data, suggestions for required information, controlled vocabulary requirements, and display issues.
• Can be a complement to AACR2 or completely separate.
• Leaves leeway for the cataloger and the individual institution to adapt the rules so that their particular data set can be retrieved, repurposed and exchanged effectively and efficiently.
• Deals with Works and Images
• sometimes an image is an image of a work, sometimes the image is a work in itself.  They can be both, simultaneously: the difference is found in the particular level of cataloging and access point.
• Deals with Specificity and Exhaustivity
• allows and encourages catalogers to be as descriptive as possible, within time, space and funding constraints.  Less is not more, it is less.
• Like FRBR, deals with Relationships between things:
• Related
• Intrinsic
• Whole/Part
• Group and Collection
• Series
• Componants
• Extrinsic
• like AACR2's "see also"
• Like FRBR is also a very visual model with the relationships between entities shown as flow charts, with reciprocity
• Has required elements (not required but listed are in 2nd level bullet)
• Work Type
• Title
• language
• Creator
• Controlled Creator 
• Role
• Measurements 
• Materials and Techniques
• Type
• Technique
• Color
• Extent
• Edition
• State
• Inscription
• Facture
• Physical Description
• Condition
• Conservation History
• Style
• Culture
• Date: earliest and latest
• Current Location
• creation location
• discovery location
• former location
• Subject 
• extent and subject type
• Class
• Description
• View Description
• View Type
• View Subject
• Personal and Corporate Name
• Names
• Biography
• Birth and Death date
• Nationality
• Life Roles
• Sources
• gender
• earliest and latest activity
• related people 
• events
• Geographic Place
• Names
• Place Type
• Broader Context
• Sources
• coordinates
• dates
• related places
• relationship type
• Concept
• Terms
• Broader Context
• Note
• Sources
• term qualifier
• dates
• related concepts
• relationship type
• Subject
• Names
• Sources
• Broader Context
• related keywords
• related subjects
• related geographic places
• related people
• related concepts
• relationship type

MARC

• Machine Readable Cataloging
• A standardized way to format bibliographic information so that when entered into a computer it creates an understandable record for the item.
• Currently in its 21st revision since being developed by the Library of Congress in the 1960's
• Pre-web, pre-a lot of things.
• Has both variable and fixed fields 
• 200 Fields numbered from 001 to 880 
• 001 to 099 are fixed fields containing standard numbers, classification numbers, codes, and other data elements relating to the record.
• 800 subfields 
• 999 tags (according to these folks)
• subfields convey certain information about the field and are expressed as $a, $c, each delimiter expressing the kind of information found in the following subfield
• uses letters and symbols to indicate additional information such as format or additional part of a record
• Only 4% of fields account for 80% of all records
• In a study done by OCLC, out of 56 MILLION records, only one used the 656 856 field. (
• so terribly sorry.
• Roy Tennant, Senior Program Manager for OCLC, said "MARC must die"
• No entities other than libraries use it
• "Lossy Output Format" William Moen said this.
• Originally intended as a transfer format (!!!) but ended up as a metadata scheme.

"Of course the importance of using internationally accepted standards is beyond doubt, but there clearly exists widespread misunderstanding of the functions of certain standards, like for instance MARC. MARCis NOT a data storage format. In my opinion MARC is not even an exchange format, but merely a presentation format"  

from http://commonplace.net/2009/05/who-needs-marc/.

RDA

• Resource Description and Access
• created concurrently but separately with ICP, the new IFLA cataloging principles
• Utilizes FRBR and FRAD
• grew out of AACR3, which was never really created
• Web-based
• Is not a display standard like MARC but does show visually how data is connected
• Includes a broader, expanded view of the bibliographic universe
• Two parts: Recording Attributes and Recording Relationships
• Shows more connections, relationships and pathways
• Change in technology, focus and view
• Metadata can be used beyond the library and catalogs will no longer be isolated because they will be online, where there is global access to the data
• Has 4 groups
• FRBR #1
• Work
• Expression
• Manifestation
• Item
• FRBR #2
• Person
• Family
• Corporate Body
• FRBR #3
• Concept
• Object
• Event
• Place
• FRAD
• Name

Sources and References
I would recommend looking at my previous blog entry titled The Recipe of Alphabet Soup which gives direct links to every site I accessed to write this entry.  All texts used are cited below.

Mortimer, Mary. Learn Descriptive Cataloging. 2nd ed. Friendswood, TX: Total Recall,   2007. Print.
Mortimer, Mary.  Learn Dewey Decimal Classification. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2000.
JSC for revision of AACR. Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules.  2002 Revision, 2005 update.  Chicago: American Library Association, 2005
Taylor, Arlene. Understanding FRBR: what it is an how it will affect our retrieval tools. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 2007.
Baca, Murtha, Patricia Harpring, Elisa Lanzi, Linda McRae, and Ann Whiteside on behalf of the Visual Resources Association.  Cataloging Cultural Objects: a Guide to Describing Cultural Works and Their Images.  Chicago: American Library Association, 2006
Tillett, Barbara. "What is FRBR?." Library of Congress Cataloging Distribution Service. (2004): online pamphlet available at http://www.loc.gov/cds/FRBR.html
RDA core elements and description from the American Library Association, updated 06/01/09. 

Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup:AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC webinar attended live Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 1 PM to 2:30 PM
Slides with correct information that has not been filtered through my thinking processes available at: http://www.niso.org/news/events/2009/bibcontrol09/
lectures given by:
Tillett, Barbara
Hillmann, Diane L.
Moen, William E.

Dr. Moen is the one who gave the Roy Tennant quote.